Transcription

1 EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 44(3), , 2009 Copyright C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: print / online DOI: / Why Teachers Adopt a Controlling Motivating Style Toward Students and How They Can Become More Autonomy Supportive Johnmarshall Reeve Department of Educational Psychology University of Wisconsin Milwaukee A recurring paradox in the contemporary K-12 classroom is that, although students educationally and developmentally benefit when teachers support their autonomy, teachers are often controlling during instruction. To understand and remedy this paradox, the article pursues three goals. First, the article characterizes the controlling style by defining it, articulating the conditions under which it is most likely to occur, linking it to poor student outcomes, explaining why it undermines these outcomes, identifying its manifest instructional behaviors, and differentiating it from an autonomy-supportive style. Second, the article identifies seven reasons to explain why the controlling style is so prevalent. These reasons show how pressures on teachers from above, from below, and from within can create classroom conditions that make the controlling style both understandable and commonplace. Third, the article offers a remedy to the paradox by articulating how teachers can become more autonomy supportive. Three essential tasks are discussed. Special attention is paid to practical examples of what teachers can do to support students autonomy. Controlling is the interpersonal sentiment and behavior teachers provide during instruction to pressure students to think, feel, or behave in a specific way (Assor, Kaplan, Kanat- Mayman, & Roth, 2005; Reeve, Deci, & Ryan, 2004). Its opposite is autonomy support (Deci & Ryan, 1985), which is the interpersonal sentiment and behavior teachers provide to identify, nurture, and develop students inner motivational resources (Assor, Kaplan, & Roth, 2002; Reeve et al., 2004). As opposites, controlling and autonomy support represent a single bipolar continuum to conceptualize the quality or ambience of a teacher s motivating style toward students (Deci, Schwartz, Sheinman, & Ryan, 1981). Such a style is an important educational construct because students of autonomy-supportive teachers display markedly more positive classroom functioning and educational outcomes than do students of controlling teachers (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Reeve & Jang, 2006; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Correspondence should be addressed to Johnmarshall Reeve, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, 709 Enderis Hall, Milwaukee, WI STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Given that students relatively benefit when teachers support their autonomy but relatively suffer when teachers control their behavior, one might expect that teachers would commonly enact autonomy-supportive instructional behaviors and only rarely enact controlling ones. This does not, however, seem to be the case. When trained, objective raters score teachers naturally occurring instructional behaviors in terms of how autonomy supportive versus controlling they are, raters generally score teachers, on average, as tending toward the controlling style. For instance, raters scored one group of high school teachers as relying frequently on extrinsic motivators to spark students engagement in learning activities, tending toward pressuring-inducing language, neglecting to provide explanatory rationales for their requests, and opposing students complaints and expressions of negative affect (Reeve, Jang, Carrell, Barch, & Jeon, 2004). Jang and her colleagues reported a teacher observation study with similar findings (Jang, Reeve, & Deci, in press). Other research shows that teachers typically enact both autonomy-supportive and controlling behaviors during a given instructional episode, though controlling behaviors are more common (Assor et al., 2002). Another observation

2 160 REEVE TABLE 1 Definition, Enabling Conditions, and Instructional Behaviors Associated with Controlling and With Autonomy Support Controlling Definition Interpersonal sentiment and behavior teachers provide during instruction to pressure students to think, feel, or behave in a specific way. Enabling conditions Adopt the teacher s perspective. Intrude into students thoughts, feelings, or actions. Pressure students to think, feel, or behave in a specific way. Instructional behaviors Rely on outer sources of motivation. Neglect explanatory rationales. Rely on pressure-inducing language. Display impatience for students to produce the right answer. Assert power to overcome students complaints and expressions of negative affect. Autonomy Support Definition Interpersonal sentiment and behavior teachers provide during instruction to identify, nurture, and develop students inner motivational resources. Enabling conditions Adopt the students perspective. Welcome students thoughts, feelings, and actions. Support students motivational development and capacity for autonomous self-regulation. Instructional behaviors Nurture inner motivational resources. Provide explanatory rationales. Rely on noncontrolling and informational language. Display patience to allow time for self-paced learning. Acknowledge and accept expressions of negative affect. study of 1st-year teachers showed that beginning teachers commonly used controlling strategies (e.g., offered rewards) but only rarely used autonomy-supportive ones (e.g., provided rationales; Newby, 1991). The conclusion seems to be that teachers often adopt a controlling motivating style during instruction. This is a problem because this more commonly enacted style is associated with relatively negative student functioning whereas the less commonly enacted style is associated with relatively more positive functioning. The present article pursues three purposes. The first purpose is to present the problem. To do so, the article characterizes the controlling motivating style by defining it, articulating the conditions under which it is most likely to occur, identifying its manifest instructional behaviors, differentiating it from an autonomy-supportive style, and explaining why it generally undermines students positive functioning and outcomes. The second purpose is to understand why the problem occurs. To do so, the article explains why teachers often adopt a controlling style, despite its negative implications for students functioning. Seven reasons are offered to illustrate how a controlling style reflects a teacher s reaction to pressures imposed from above (demands from school administrators), from below (student passivity during a learning activity), and from within (control-oriented dispositions within the teacher himself or herself). Collectively, these reasons explain why a controlling style is both understandable and commonplace. The third purpose is to remedy the problem. To do so, the article articulates how teachers can become more autonomy supportive, even while acknowledging their day-to-day experience of feeling pushed and pulled by forces favoring a controlling style. Three essential tasks underlie the effort to adopt a more autonomy-supportive style namely, become less controlling, appreciate the benefits of an autonomy-supportive style for students and teachers alike, and learn the practical how to of supporting autonomy in terms of specific instructional behaviors. Special attention is paid to practical examples of what teachers can do to support students autonomy. TEACHERS MOTIVATING STYLES This section characterizes both ends of the motivating style continuum, identifies the conditions that orient teachers toward a controlling or autonomy-supportive style, lists the instructional behaviors closely associated with each style, and explains why a controlling style generally undermines students functioning and outcomes while an autonomysupportive style generally promotes them. To frame this discussion, Table 1 provides the definition, enabling conditions, and instructional behaviors associated with each style. The Nature of a Controlling Style Three conditions make any approach to motivating students a controlling one: (a) adopt only the teacher s perspective; (b) intrude into students thoughts, feelings, or actions; and (c) pressure students to think, feel, or behave in particular ways. Although teachers do not necessarily set out to be controlling per se, they do sometimes think rather exclusively about student motivation and engagement from their own perspective; intrude into students ways of thinking, feeling, and behaving; and push and pressure students to think, feel, or behave in a specific way. That is, the enabling conditions that orient teachers toward a controlling style are the lack of the students perspective, intrusion, and pressure. The starting point for a controlling motivating style is the prioritization of the teacher s perspective to the point that it

3 WHY TEACHERS ARE CONTROLLING 161 overruns the students perspective. 1 By itself, the adoption of the teacher s perspective during instruction is not controlling, as teachers routinely recommend to students a multitude of constructive ways of thinking (e.g., a goal or learning strategy), feeling (e.g., a situationally appropriate emotion), or behaving (e.g., an effective course of action). Such recommendations become controlling only when they overrun the students perspective via intrusion and pressure. To capture the essence of teacher intrusion into students own ways of thinking, feeling, or behaving, Assor and colleagues (2005) referred to explicit attempts to fully and instantly change the behaviors children presently engage in or the opinions they hold (p. 398). Controlling further involves the application of sufficient pressure until students change their behaviors and opinions. In practice, acts of intrusion and pressure lead students to forego their internal frame of reference and their natural rhythm during a learning activity to, instead, absorb and respond to the pressure to think, feel, or behave in a teacher-defined way. For instance, for one reason or another (which is discussed later), a teacher might interrupt a student s activity (intrusion) and redirect that activity by using directive language to behave differently (pressure). One example might be to take a pencil or paintbrush out of a student s hands and tell her in no uncertain terms to hold it a different way. A second example would be to impatiently cross out a student s passive verbs, label it as bad writing, and require that he use active verbs. Crucially, recommendations to regrip a pencil or compose in the active voice are not controlling acts of instruction. The teacher s style becomes controlling only with the neglect of the student s perspective (not asking why the student is doing what she is doing), the introduction of intrusion (i.e., taking the pencil out of the student hands, reaching in, and crossing out the composition), and the application of pressure (i.e., forceful language, guilt-inducing criticisms) to think, feel, or behave in a specific way (i.e., hold the pencil like this, use these verbs but disuse these other verbs). Table 1 lists the instructional behaviors most closely associated with a controlling style. When acting in controlling ways, teachers tend to rely on outer sources of motivation (e.g., directives, deadlines, incentives, consequences, threats of punishment), neglect to provide explanatory rationales (e.g., make little effort to explain why they are asking students to engage in requested endeavors), rely on pressuringinducing language (utter should s, have to s, got to s, and guilt-inducing criticisms), display impatience for students to produce the right answer (e.g., intrude on students natural rhythm to produce a right answer on the teacher s timetable), and react to students complaints and expressions of negative 1 Extremely controlling motivating styles are rare in schools. To understand the psychological and cultural processes involved in the antecedents, manifestations, and consequences of an extremely controlling motivating style, one needs to examine custodial environments such as the military setting (e.g., see Ricks, 1997). affect with authoritarian power assertions (e.g., counter students criticisms with no-nonsense assertions, such as Quit your complaining and just get the work done ). These instructional behaviors are all positively intercorrelated, utilize social influence techniques (e.g., behavior modification, classroom management, conditional positive regard, power assertion), and collectively provide teachers with the means to intrude on students thinking, feeling, and behaving with enough pressure to increase the likelihood that the student will adopt a teacher-specified way of thinking, feeling, or behaving (Assor et al., 2002; Assor et al., 2005; Reeve, 2006; Reeve, Jang, Carroll, Barch, & Jeon, 2004). Teachers express a controlling motivating style in two ways, including direct (or external) control and indirect (or internal) control (Assor et al., 2005; Assor, Roth, & Deci, 2004; Barber, 1996; Vansteenkiste, Simons, Lens, Soenens, & Matos, 2005). 2 Direct control involves a teacher s explicit and overt attempts to motivate students by creating external compulsions to act, such as through the imposition of deadlines, verbal commands, or environmental incentives. Directly controlling acts of instruction induce in students an external perceived locus of causality and environmentally controlled regulation. A simple example would be the teacher commanding a student to revise her paper. Indirect control involves a teacher s subtle or covert attempts to motivate students by creating internal compulsions to act, such as through feelings of guilt, shame, and anxiety (Barber, 1996), by threatening to withdraw attention or approval (Assor et al., 2004), by linking a way of thinking, feeling, or behaving to the student s self-esteem (Ryan, 1982), by cultivating perfectionist standards or self-representations (Soenens, Vansteenkiste, Duriez, Luyten, & Goossens, 2005), or by offering conditional regard more generally (Assor et al., 2004). Indirectly controlling acts of instruction induce in students an internally controlled type of regulation. Internally controlled regulation is different from internally endorsed regulation in that, with the former, students perceive that the costs for not doing what others say are so high (in terms of guilt, shame, anxiety, love withdrawal, self-esteem loss, perfectionistic self-representation) that they cannot choose to act otherwise (hence, their thinking and acting is controlled). A simple example would be the teacher utterance, A good student would revise her paper, wouldn t she? 2 For an illustration of how direct control and indirect control have been operationalized in the empirical literature, see Vansteenkiste, Simons, et al. (2005, p. 488). With a sample of fifth- and sixth-grade students, these authors operationally defined direct control by utilizing instructional language to promote external compulsions such as you should follow the guidelines, you have to, and you are expected to. They operationally defined indirect control by utilizing instructional language to promote internal compulsions such as, it is important for your own good to read this text carefully, and a lot of kids following the guidelines... to feel good about themselves and to avoid feeling guilty for not doing so.

4 162 REEVE The Nature of an Autonomy-Supportive Style Three conditions make any approach to motivating students an autonomy-supportive one: (a) adopt the students perspective; (b) welcome students thoughts, feelings, and behaviors; and (c) support students motivational development and capacity for autonomous self-regulation. By taking and integrating the students perspective into the flow of instruction, teachers become both more willing and more able to create classroom conditions in which students autonomous motivations align with their classroom activity. By welcoming students ways of thinking, feeling, and behaving, teachers acknowledge and appreciate the motivational potential inherent within students thoughts, emotions, and behavioral intentions. By acknowledging students capacity for autonomous self-regulation, teacher student interactions revolve not only around daily support for students academic pursuits but also around long-term (developmental) support to generate and regulate academic motivation of their own. Table 1 lists the instructional behaviors most closely associated with an autonomy-supportive style. When they act in autonomy-supportive ways, teachers nurture students inner motivational resources (e.g., interests, preferences, psychological needs), provide explanatory rationales (e.g., articulate the sometimes hidden usefulness underlying a teacher s request), rely on noncontrolling language (e.g., informational communications that help students diagnose and solve their motivational problems), display patience to allow students the time they need for self-paced learning to occur (e.g., allow time for students to work in their own way), and acknowledge and accept students expressions of negative affect (e.g., treat students complaints as valid reactions to imposed demands and structures). These instructional behaviors are all positively intercorrelated, nurture students motivational development, and collectively provide students with an interpersonal relationship that affords them with opportunities to experience personal autonomy, psychological need satisfaction, and positive functioning in general (Assor et al., 2002; Reeve, 2006; Reeve, Jang, et al., 2004). Students Benefit When Teachers Support Their Autonomy A review of the published empirical literature reveals 44 data-based investigations of the relationship between students school functioning and teachers motivating styles (autonomy-supportive vs. controlling). To quantify teachers motivating styles, these studies typically used one of three approaches teachers self-reports (e.g., Problems in Schools questionnaire; Deci, Schwartz, et al., 1981), students ratings (e.g., Learning Climate Questionnaire; Black & Deci, 2000), or observers objective ratings (e.g., Reeve, Jang, et al., 2004). The dependent measures utilized in these studies included a wide range of important outcomes and indices of positive functioning covering students motivation, engagement, development, learning, performance, and psychological well-being. These dependent measures appear in Table 2 grouped under six categories of positive functioning (i.e., educational benefits). About half of these studies were questionnaire-based investigations (23 of 44, 52%) that suggest only a nondirectional correlation between a teacher s style and student outcomes, whereas the other half of the studies were experimentally based investigations (21 of 44, 48%) than confirm a directional effect that a teacher s style has on student outcomes. The findings from virtually every one of these empirical studies point to the same conclusion namely, that students relatively benefit from autonomy support and relatively suffer from being controlled. Further, despite some theoretical claims that adolescence may need or benefit from autonomy support to a greater degree than do children (Feldman & Quartman, 1988), research findings TABLE 2 Students Educational Benefits from Teacher-Provided Autonomy Support Psychological Motivation Engagement Development Learning Performance Well-Being Intrinsic motivation 12,14,19,34 Engagement 3,19,21,32,38 Self-esteem and self-worth 12,14 Conceptual understanding Grades 6,9,18,39,41 Psychological well-being 6,8,13,23,37 Competence 6,14,35,44 Positive emotion 16,30,35 Creativity 1,23 Deep processing 41,42 Task performance 7,15,16 School/Life satisfaction 22,24 Autonomy 9,31,34 Less negative Preference for optimal Active information Standardized test Vitality 26,27,29 emotion 2,6,20,28 challenge 9,14,36 processing 25 scores 9 Relatedness 4,21 Mastery motivation and perceived control 14,35 Class attendance 9 Self-regulation strategies 43 Curiosity 14 Persistence 10 Internalized values 11,18,33 School retention (vs. dropping out) 20,40 Note. The superscripted numbers in the table represent the source of the supportive evidence that exposure to autonomy-supportive teachers facilitates that particular outcome. The corresponding number associated with each outcome measure appears in the references at the end of the article.

5 WHY TEACHERS ARE CONTROLLING 163 consistently show that children and adolescences alike benefit from autonomy support and suffer from being controlled (Assor et al., 2002). The purpose of providing the information in Table 2 is not to offer a comprehensive review (e.g., meta-analysis) of the literature on whether teachers motivating styles affect students outcomes but is, instead, to affirm the premise on which the present paper is built namely, that a teacher s motivating style is an important educational construct because students function more positively when teachers support their autonomy rather than control and pressure them toward a specific way of thinking, feeling, or behaving. This conclusion has been shown to apply across a diverse range of students, including students in preschool (Koestner, Ryan, Bernieri, & Holt, 1984), elementary school (Deci, Schwartz, et al., 1981), middle school (Vansteenkiste, Simons, et al., 2005), high school (Reeve, Jang, et al., 2004), college (Vansteenkiste, Simons, Lens, Sheldon, & Deci, 2004), graduate school (Sheldon & Krieger, 2004), students with special needs (Deci, Hodges, Pierson, & Tomassone, 1992), students in after-school programs (Grolnick, Farkas, Sohmer, Michaels, & Valsiner, 2007), and students around the globe (Chirkov, Ryan, & Willness, 2005; Levesque, Zuehlke, Stanek, & Ryan, 2004), including those schooled in collectivistic cultures (Jang, Reeve, & Ryan, in press; Vansteenkiste, Zhou, Lens, & Soenens, 2005). 3 Why a Controlling Motivating Style Undermines Students Positive Functioning (and Why an Autonomy-Supportive Style Promotes It) A controlling motivating style undermines students positive functioning and outcomes because it induces in students an external perceived locus of causality, a sense of pressure, and a sense of obligation to others or to one s own negative emotion; an autonomy-supportive style promotes student outcomes because it supports in students an internal perceived locus of causality, an experience of volition, and a sense of choice (Reeve, Nix, & Hamm, 2003). When students engage in learning activities without the support of an internal locus, volition, and perceived choice, their engagement lacks the motivational foundation of personal interest, valuing, task involvement, positive feelings, selfinitiative, personal causation, a desire to continue, and the type of high-quality motivation (creativity, intrinsic motivation, preference for challenge) that foreshadows the positive outcomes listed in Table 2. It is this contrast between engaging in a task with versus without these autonomous sources of motivation that differentiates the positive functioning and 3 When experimental studies include a neutral motivating style as a control condition, results continue to show that students relatively benefit from a teacher s autonomy support and relatively suffer from teacher control (Grolnick & Ryan, 1987; Reeve, Jang, et al., 2004; Reeve & Tseng, 2009b). outcomes of autonomy-supported students from the negative functioning and outcomes of autonomy-suppressed students. An additional reason why a controlling style undermines students positive functioning is because it typically prioritizes and taps rather exclusively into only the behavioral aspect of students engagement on-task attention, effort, and persistence (Reeve & Tseng, 2009a). Following the theoretical lead of others (e.g., Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004; Perry, Turner, & Meyer, 2006; Skinner & Belmont, 1993; Stefanou, Perencevich, DiCintio, & Turner, 2004), contemporary educational psychology research generally conceptualizes student engagement both as a multidimensional construct and as a crucial mediating variable between student motivation and important school-related outcomes such as those listed in Table 2. That is, student engagement is a multidimensional construct consisting of four relatively equally weighted indicators (behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and voice) whose individual components are all able to explain unique (separate) variance in outcomes such as student achievement (Reeve & Tseng, 2009a). This conceptualization is important to explaining why a controlling style undermines students positive functioning because (a) a controlling style is insufficient to support the full range of students engagement; (b) a controlling style that targets only behavioral engagement (e.g., pay attention, you should work harder ) can interfere with, undermine, and put these other aspects of engagement at risk; whereas (c) an autonomysupportive style encourages and sustains high levels of all four of these aspects of engagement (Jang, Reeve, & Deci, in press; Reeve, Jang, et al., 2004). WHY TEACHERS ADOPT A CONTROLLING MOTIVATING STYLE The prevalence of the controlling motivating style in the contemporary K-12 classroom needs to be explained. Research shows that several forces influence whether and to what extent a teacher will display a controlling style during instruction. Some of these influences are implicitly or explicitly imposed on the teacher by outside agents, such as school policies, administrators, parents, societal expectations, or cultural norms. Other influences arise out of and during classroom dynamics, such as students listless reaction to a learning activity and the moment-to-moment stream of behavior of what students say, do, and do not do during instruction. Still other influences arise from within the teacher himself or herself, as through personality dispositions and beliefs about the nature of student motivation. To organize these multiple influences into a coherent framework, Pelletier, Seguin-Levesque, and Legault (2002) offered the distinction between pressures from above (e.g., administrators, state standards) and pressures from below (e.g., students). To this framework, a third category may be added namely, pressure from within. Pressure from

6 164 REEVE TABLE 3 Seven Reasons Why Teachers Adopt a Controlling Motivating Style Toward Students Pressure from above 1. Teachers occupy an inherently powerful social role. Teacher-student interactions take place within a context of an interpersonal power differential between interactants. 2. Teachers harbor the dual burdens of responsibility and accountability. Teachers routinely face job conditions steeped in accountability and responsibility for student behaviors and outcomes. 3. Teachers are aware that controlling is cultural valued. The U.S. culture generally evaluates teachers who use controlling instructional strategies as more competent than teachers who use autonomy-supportive strategies. 4. Teachers sometimes equate control with structure. Controlling strategies are often inappropriately associated with a structured learning environment, whereas autonomy-supportive strategies are often inappropriately associated with a chaotic or laissez-faire one. Pressure from below 5. Teachers react to student passivity during learning activities. Episodically unmotivated or episodically unengaged students tend to pull a controlling style out of teachers. Pressure from within 6. Teachers tend to endorse the maximal-operant principle. Teachers beliefs about student motivation are often rooted in the maximal-operate principle of motivation. 7. Teachers may harbor control-oriented personality dispositions. Some teachers are motivationally or dispositionally oriented toward a controlling style. within represents influences that arise from a teacher s own beliefs, values, and personality dispositions. Using this threefold framework as a guide, seven meaningful influences can be identified to explain the conditions under which teachers are likely to overemphasize the teacher s perspective, act intrusively, and apply pressure during instruction that is, adopt a controlling motivating style, as listed in Table 3. Seven Reasons Why Teachers Adopt a Controlling Motivating Style Reason 1: Teachers occupy an inherently powerful social role Teacher student interactions take place within a context of an interpersonal power differential between interactants. Inherent within teacher student interactions is an interpersonal power differential. Teachers generally have a basis of power and influence over students in terms of their relatively greater authority, experience, expertise, status, or social position. To the extent that such an inherent power differential exists, students who are one-down in the power relationship are vulnerable to being controlled by teachers who are one-up in the power relationship (Deci & Ryan, 1987). Empirical research shows that the person who is one-up tends to take charge, talk first, and set the tone for the ensuing interaction, compared to the person who is onedown who tends to defer, listen first, and be influenced by the proactive behavior from the more powerful other (Magee, Galinsky, & Gruenfeld, 2007). Further, this is true when interactants are randomly assigned into these high versus low power positions, suggesting that it is the relatively powerful social role rather than the greater expertise that explains such proactivity. Thus, because teacher student interactions have a built-in power differential, a take-charge controlling style is in some sense the default interaction style for teachers. It is not inevitable, as teachers can be mindful and deliberately choose to be autonomy supportive, but a controlling style is consistent with the occupation of an inherently powerful social role. Reason 2: Teachers harbor the dual burdens of responsibility and accountability Teachers routinely face job conditions steeped in accountability and responsibility for student behaviors and outcomes. Outside forces (e.g., administrators, state standards, high-stakes testing, parents, and media reports) often place on teachers the twofold burden of responsibility and accountability for student behaviors and outcomes. To assess how this imposed burden might affect teachers motivating style toward students, teachers in a laboratory study were randomly assigned into an experimental condition in which they were given the following job condition: Your role is to ensure that the student learns to solve the puzzles. It is a teacher s responsibility to make sure that students perform up to standards. If, for example, your student were tested on the puzzles, he (or she) should be able to do well. (Deci, Spiegel, Ryan, Koestner, & Kauffman, 1982, p. 853) Compared to teachers not pressured to ensure that their students performed up to standards (i.e., a control group), the pressured teachers taught in more controlling ways, using more directives, more criticisms, and fewer opportunities for student input (Deci et al., 1982). A follow-up classroombased study also randomly assigned teachers into a pressuring experimental condition (using the same instructional set) and found that elementary-grade teachers who received the same imposed sense of responsibility and accountability taught

1 What Does It Mean for Students to Be Engaged? Teachers are constantly working to connect their students to school and to learning because they know that engagement is crucial to school success. It may

Vol.4, No.1. April 2014 pp. 17 21. Early years education: are young students intrinsically or extrinsically motivated towards school activities? A discussion about the effects of rewards on young children

POWER OF OPTIONS ON INTRINSIC MOTIVATIOn You Have a Choice: The Power of Options in the Intrinsic Motivation of Kindergarten Students Elena Collett St. Mary s College of Maryland Abstract: Previous studies

Effective teaching and classroom management is about whole child - and whole school development for knowledge, skills and human values During the past years as an outcome of the UN Study on Violence against

NATIONAL COMPETENCY-BASED TEACHER STANDARDS (NCBTS) A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT GUIDE FOR FILIPINO TEACHERS September 2006 2 NATIONAL COMPETENCY- BASED TEACHER STANDARDS CONTENTS General Introduction to

Teacher Rubric with Suggested Teacher and Student Look-fors This document is intended to inform school communities in recognizing the performance levels for key elements defined in the Teacher Rubric and

LEARNER-CENTERED PSYCHOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES: A Framework for School Reform & Redesign TABLE OF CONTENTS: Background Learner-Centered Principles Prepared by the Learner-Centered Principles Work Group of the

Motivation In Sport Motivation Motivation as defined by Sage is the direction and intensity of one s effort. Pitfalls and Dangers of Motivating? Adopting specific motivational strategies for all situations

12 Section Two: Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession 1 Teachers understand student learning and development and respect the diversity of the students they teach. Teachers display knowledge of how

University of Iowa Iowa Research Online Theses and Dissertations 2013 Supporting students' motivation in college online courses Jae-eun Lee Russell University of Iowa Copyright 2013 Jae-eun Russell This

Rehab and Beyond: Self- Determination to Continue Change does not happen overnight, but how do we keep clients coming back long enough to experience the benefits from exercise? Most people begin an exercise

CHAPTER 1: The Preceptor Role in Health Systems Management Throughout the nursing literature, the preceptor is described as a nurse who teaches, supports, counsels, coaches, evaluates, serves as role model

The MSPA Rubric for Evaluation of School Psychologists The Massachusetts School Psychologists Association (MSPA) has developed this rubric for the evaluation of school psychologists for adoption, in part

Section Three: Ohio Standards for Principals 1 Principals help create a shared vision and clear goals for their schools and ensure continuous progress toward achieving the goals. Principals lead the process

Albemarle County Schools Teacher Performance Appraisal (TPA) Rubrics The Teacher Performance Appraisal includes performance rubrics designed to guide self-assessment and reflection based on professional

Arkansas Teaching Standards The Arkansas Department of Education has adopted the 2011 Model Core Teaching Standards developed by Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) to replace

College of Education and Human Development (CEHD) Graduate School of Education (GSE) School of Recreation, Health, and Tourism (SRHT) Masters Programs Teacher Licensure Certification Programs & Advanced

NEW YORK STATE TEACHER CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS TEST DESIGN AND FRAMEWORK September 2014 Authorized for Distribution by the New York State Education Department This test design and framework document

Teacher Evaluation Missouri s Educator Evaluation System Teacher Evaluation Protocol Introduction Missouri s Educator Evaluation System was created and refined by hundreds of educators across the state.

A Behavioral Perspective of Childhood Trauma and Attachment Issues: Toward Alternative Treatment Approaches for Children with a History of Abuse By: Walter Prather and Jeannie A. Golden ABSTRACT This article

FRAMEWORK OF SUPPORT: SCHOOL-LEVEL PRACTICE PROFILE S The Framework of Supports are a set of Practice Profiles that serve as an implementation overview of Support for Personalized Learning (SPL). Practice

Supporting students in their transition to university mathematics Paul Hernandez-Martinez a, Julian Williams b and Valerie Farnsworth c a Loughborough University, b University of Manchester, c University

CHAPTER 4: PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION CHAPTER OVERVIEW Chapter 4 introduces you to the related concepts of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination. The chapter begins with definitions of these three

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Professional Development Self- Assessment Guidebook For Teacher Professional Development Offerings Modified for use by the District and School

Aspirations Index Scale Description Aspirations refer to people s life goals, and SDT research on aspirations has focused on the relative strength of intrinsic aspirations (viz., meaningful relationships,

Rubric for Evaluating Colorado s Specialized Service Professionals: School Psychologists Definition of an Effective School Psychologist Effective school psychologists are vital members of the education

By Daniel H. Pink Summary: The use of rewards and punishments to control our employees production is an antiquated way of managing people. To maximize their enjoyment and productivity for 21 st century

Pedagogy and Motivation in Introductory Accounting Courses Abstract: Motivation is an integral part of the learning process.most studies in accounting that examine the effect of motivation in student learning

STANDARD I: ELEMENT A: Teachers demonstrate leadership Teachers lead in their classroom Developing Has assessment data available and refers to it to understand the skills and abilities of students Accesses

Principal Performance Review Office of School Quality Division of Teaching and Learning Principal Practice Observation Tool 2014-15 The was created as an evidence gathering tool to be used by evaluators

KidsMatter Early Childhood Connecting with the Early Childhood Education and Care National Quality Framework KidsMatter Early Childhood KidsMatter Early Childhood Mental Health Initiative has been developed

Employee Engagement Special Report Leveraging Engagement for Profitability What is an engaged employee and how important are they to my business? An engaged employee cares about more than just receiving

Research Basis for Catchup Math Robert S. Ryan, Ph. D. Associate Professor of Cognitive Psychology Kutztown University Preface Kutztown University is a 4 year undergraduate university that is one of 14

Illinois Professional Teaching Standards Preamble: We believe that all students have the potential to learn rigorous content and achieve high standards. A well-educated citizenry is essential for maintaining

Standards for Professional Development APRIL 2015 Ohio Standards for Professional Development April 2015 Page 1 Introduction All of Ohio s educators and parents share the same goal that Ohio s students

VISION STATEMENT Through research, academic, and clinical activities, the School and Applied Child Psychology Program emphasizes the inherent strengths of all learners and strives to develop optimal outcomes

2011 RATING A TEACHER OBSERVATION TOOL Five ways to ensure classroom observations are focused and rigorous Contents The Role of Observation Criteria and Tools Assessing Quality of Criteria and Tools: Five

GUIDELINES FOR THE IEP TEAM DATA COLLECTION & Progress Monitoring Decisions about the effectiveness of an intervention must be based on data, not guesswork. Frequent, repeated measures of progress toward

Intrinsic Need Satisfaction: A Motivational Basis of Performance and Well-Being in Two Work Settings 1 PAUL P. BAARD 2 Departments of Communications and Management Fordham University EDWARD L. DECI University

Professional Development Needs Assessment for Teachers Name _ Grade Level / Subject Date ABOUT THIS INSTRUMENT: RCB Medical Arts Academy places a high priority on the continuing professional development

Positive Psychology in the Israeli School System Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Maytiv Center s Intervention Programs in Schools Research Report Dr. Anat Shoshani, Dr. Sarit Steinmetz School of Psychology,

A Study in Learning Styles of Construction Management Students Amit Bandyopadhyay, Ph.D., PE, F.ASCE State University of New York -FSC Abstract Students take in and process information in different ways.

1 PARENT-CHILD INTERACTION THERAPY Lori Day, Ph.D. & Elizabeth Adams, Ph.D. *A special thanks to PCIT International for some of the content on the following slides. Disruptive Behavior Disorders 2 Most

Lindsay Unified School District Mission Statement ~Empowering and Motivating for Today and Tomorrow~ - Adopted by Lindsay Unified School Board: May 21, 2007 Mission: Empowering and Motivating for Today

The Links between Preschool Programs and School Completion Comments on Hauser-Cram 1, McDonald Connor and Morrison 2, and Ou and Reynolds Topic School completion KATHRYN R. WENTZEL, PhD University of Maryland,

Rubric for Evaluating Colorado s Specialized Service Professionals: School Nurses Definition of an Effective School Nurse Effective school nurses are vital members of the education team. They are properly

1 Behavioral Intervention: Designing the Approach to Fit Your Purpose Safety pros intervene every day in an attempt to improve safety performance. When they target people's behavior they are implementing

Developing Resilient Teams for Managing Change Research and experience from ODR Introduction When teams address the challenges of today s turbulent work environment, there is potential for effective and

Wise Ways / Center on Innovation & Improvement CL17 Indicator: Professional development for teachers is determined by data (including classroom observations and review of lesson plans) that demonstrate

CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT CURRICULUM & DEVELOPMENT DIVISION Licensed Employee Appraisal System Enhancing Professional Practice Professional Domain Standards and Indicators Levels of Performance Rubric

This month, December Re-engaging Students: Using a student s time off in ways that pay off! Re-engaging Students: Using a student s time off in ways that pay off! For school staff and students the winter

Nurturing Early Learners A Curriculum Framework for Kindergartens in Singapore A Guide for Parents A Strong Start for Every Child 1 A Strong Start for Every Child A Word to Parents Parents know that the

Re-Definition of Leadership and Its Implications for Educational Administration Daniel C. Jordan Citation: Jordan, D. (1973). Re-definition of leadership and its implications for educational administration.

Adopted by state board of education of ohio October, Ohio Standards for School Counselors Ohio Standards for School Counselors ii Contents Section I: Overview of the Ohio Standards for School Counselors...

Teacher Education Portfolio Guidelines and Rubric The Teacher Education Portfolio is developed throughout a s program. Most Teacher Education courses have a capstone project designed to meet the InTASC

INDIVIDUAL CHANGE Learning and the process of change in what ways can models of learning help us understand individual change? The behavioural approach to change how can we change people s behaviour? The

THE LEADERSHIP ASSESSMENT THAT ILLUMINATES LEADER EFFECTIVENESS CONNECTING PATTERNS OF ACTION WITH HABITS OF THOUGHT The Leadership Circle Profile (LCP) is a true breakthrough among 360 degree profiles.

Framework: Core Functions, Indicators, and Key Questions The Core Functions and Indicators, which form the structure for the delivery and execution of (Illinois CSI) services, describe the big ideas or